Hi Pedro,
thanks a lot for this. I added this with a few changes (including a link
to the posters and poster number references) to
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Rome-lux-prep#Draft_agenda
one major change: Tadej / JSI is part of the agenda with a demo. I think
this is very important since at least Cocomore and Enlaso will (in 2013)
make use of Enrycher output.
Am 27.02.13 22:02, schrieb Pedro L. Díez Orzas:
> Hi Felix,
>
> As promissed I send a new draft agenda for the Friday meeting. It follows the posters and your timing structure. Separately, I also list at the end some posters were not included in the current draft (Tadej's for instance) so you can see what and how.
>
> What I can tell you is that it is a very tight schedule. In any case, since we will be trained from Roma non having food during lunch but having demos, we could do the same in Lux :-).
Hah! I won't follow this suggestion :) Also, for Rome we will make sure
to have food, definitely.
Best,
Felix
>
> Best,
> Pedro
>
>
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
> Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de febrero de 2013 19:17
> Para: Jirka Kosek
> CC: "Pedro L. Díez Orzas"; 'Yves Savourel'; public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org; 'dave lewis'; 'Clemens Weins'; 'Phil Ritchie'; 'Ankit Srivastava'; 'Arle Lommel'
> Asunto: Re: [All] review draft agenda, preparation call 1 March 1-3 p.m. UTC (Friday this week)
>
> Hi Jirka, all,
>
> for the review two aspects are important:
> - have the done our work items defined in the dow?
> - have the done other cool stuff?
> validation is IMO one of the coolest outcome: it will be visible for ordinary web users, will be available for a long time, and will help a lot to do the right thing: for content / metadata creators and consumers. We already learned that during the test suite work.
>
> I have updated the draft agenda, see below http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Rome-lux-prep#Draft_agenda
> including open issues like the validation topic.
> I took up Pedro's suggestion to align this with the posters. Comments?
> If the agenda is fine for you, please prepare presentations for our review "dry" run on Friday.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
> Am 27.02.13 14:49, schrieb Jirka Kosek:
>> On 27.2.2013 11:32, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>
>>> open points are:
>>>
>>> - who would cover Jirka / validation?
>> Validation wasn't part of any WP so it's probably not necessary to
>> cover it in a great detail. I think that showing validation results of
>> some broken HTML file in validator.nu will do the job from the users perspective.
>>
>> UEP is also responsible for delivering ITS enabled customization of
>> DocBook and DITA. As schema is not stable yet -- there will be changes
>> resulting from LC comments -- I haven't worked on this. But once DoC
>> for LC is done I'm planning to update base ITS schemas, schemas used
>> for HTML validation and create ITS-aware versions of DocBook and DITA.
>>
>> Jirka
>>